Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: DI prints and IMAX?

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » DI prints and IMAX?

Author

Topic: DI prints and IMAX?

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 05-04-2007 02:11 PM

Over at Exhibitors_Screening_Room list on yahoo, mostly Drive-In guys, Jack posts:

quote:
When I was building up the print of SPIDER-MAN I noticed that the print we received for the drive in ... all of the heads and tails were marked with the title/reel # as usual .... and then it said "IMAX". We have a print for the indoor theatre also but "IMAX" was not printed on any of those reels. I was just curious if any of you had received a print like this and if so do you know what the difference is? Is it like when they sometimes made special "Drive In" prints. I called the film depot to ask them but got their answering machine, as usual. The message says their hours are from 7 am until 5 pm yet everytime I've called nobody answer the phone ... you always get the answering machine....

I understand that there used to be DI prints, a few stops lighter than normal, but I thought those were gone long ago. On the other hand, could it be something to do with the DMR conversion? Perhaps some prints were struck from the DMR negs? Just curious. And if it is one of those thinner prints, how does it get a designation "IMAX"? I could understand maybe "RCMH," as in Radio City Music Hall because they also used to get specially timed "thin" prints. IMAX doesn't print lighter release prints, do they? Printing at greater value than spec does havoc with the gamma and hence color saturation. Surely IMAX is could not be guilty of such shennanagans, eh? Although given the fact that they think the can get IMAX-wow and visual super-resolution out of 2 Sony 4K projectors and a little DMR manipulation to make resolution out of a sow's ear, me thinks they are in shennagan-overload. [puke]

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 05-04-2007 02:37 PM

IMAX doesn't print lighter prints, but 35mm prints "enhanced" for projection onto giant IMAX films are. These 35mm prints are essentially the same as the old D.I. prints. although Spiderman 3 has genuine IMAX prints made, this may be just the new labeling used for any 35mm print that is at a half-stop lighter than normal.

| IP: Logged

Scott D. Neff
Theatre Dork

Posts: 919
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 05-07-2007 10:54 PM

I'm told that the studio made Drive-In prints for Spiderman 3. I thought that was interesting, surprised that studios even give much consideration to drive-ins anymore.

| IP: Logged

Sam King
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 120
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Oct 2006

posted 05-07-2007 11:07 PM

It's not really making "new" prints for D.I.s, it's just having deluxe run off a few dozen lighter prints. We used to run these "enhanced" prints when we would run 35mm on our IMAX. But we upgraded the lamphouse to a custom glass reflector and 6k bulb and now we can use regular 35mm. It still looks like crap, but at least it's not washed out. I believe the D.I. prints are "2 levels" lighters than standard. Someone feel free to correct my terminology.

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 05-07-2007 11:39 PM

quote: Scott D. Neff
I'm told that the studio made Drive-In prints for Spiderman 3. I thought that was interesting, surprised that studios even give much consideration to drive-ins anymore.

I probably see anywhere between 50-100 "DI" or "IMAX" prints a year (they're printed identically). Some drive-ins need them a lot more than others. Oddly enough it's usually the drive-ins with the smaller screens that need them.

For the most part the DI prints aren't bad (the drive-ins that need them have sucky contrast anyway)... just hope to hell that you don't need a replacement reel as, in Ontario, there's at most 1 spare DI print at the Toronto depots, so if you can't get that spare print and you can't talk them into a complete regular print you'll be stuck with 1 regular reel in the middle of a DI print.

| IP: Logged

Jack Ondracek
Film God

Posts: 2348
From: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 05-07-2007 11:55 PM

quote: Scott D. Neff
I thought that was interesting, surprised that studios even give much consideration to drive-ins anymore.

A common observation.

The studios have always had a love/hate relationship with drive-ins. On one hand, it seems to screw with their system that so many of us don't book anything during the winter. We're also looking to book combinations in a single-feature world. On the other hand, they're usually very pleased with our Summertime grosses, and are most willing to accept our percentages.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-08-2007 07:38 AM

What does "2-levels" mean? Is that two "printing points" or two "stops"? I'm guessing the latter, but am now curious.

| IP: Logged

Barry Floyd
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1079
From: Lebanon, Tennessee, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 05-08-2007 08:35 AM

We recieved one of the IMAX / Drive-In prints, and it looked fantastic on our screen. Probably would have looked alot better without the rain though.

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 05-08-2007 03:44 PM

At least you didn't have a new radio station start testing on the same frequency that you were broadcasting Spider Man on. [Frown]

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 05-11-2007 02:55 PM

quote: Scott Norwood
What does "2-levels" mean? Is that two "printing points" or two "stops"? I'm guessing the latter, but am now curious.

I suspect it is two printer lights (2 x 0.025 Log Exposure). This would make the print about 0.15 density (1/2 stop) lighter in the midscale. Any more than this would risk looking quite "washed out".

| IP: Logged

Steve Wilson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 109
From: Paoli, IN, USA
Registered: May 2004

posted 05-13-2007 02:00 AM

Personally John P, as a 22 year photo studio owner, I hate drive in prints because the colors do look extreemly washed out.

They look to me to be at least a full stop and maybe a tad bit more lighter. But, they can be a big help if the Drive In cannot get enough light on the screen as was my case with a 68 foot screen and a 2k bulb. I now have 4k.

Not always being first run, I would call a buddy of mine in a city about 50 miles from my drive in and beg him for his Drive in print when he finished his run, then, I would clear it with distribution and I would self circuit the print myself. A whole lot of trouble, but it saved me disappoining my customers several times.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.